Referring to the fact that the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia Saint Petroc Monastery has published and uses a version of the Sarum Use of the Western Rite Divine Liturgy which differs markedly from that published by the non-Orthodox Saint Hilarion Press, monk Aidan (the author) has published the following:
Initial Note: SHP means Saint Hilarion Press. This press was and is owned by a non-canonical group calling itself Orthodox.
Very soon after the 45 Objections were e-broadcast, St. Petroc withdrew that text and issued a Sarum Mass text (with some local edits), called the "Usus Cascadae"
This is untrue. It was untrue when it was originally published and it is still untrue now that it has been re-published.
The Saint Colman Prayer Book was in the course of compilation from 1997 to 2003 and at that stage, the texts of the three versions of the Divine Liturgy contained therein had been proof read by Archbishop Hilarion and his letter of authorisation for inclusion had been written.
(Since that time, additional material to the Book - but NOT to the Liturgies - has been required and has now been completed)
The text of the Sarum (Usus Cascadae) Liturgy is essentially the Sarum Use as translated into English by A. Harford Pearson and published in 1868 - although including some few translations of our own. Pearson noted in his introduction that he had preferred the Authorised Version for Biblical texts and the Coverdale (BCP) version for Psalms as being most familiar to our culture and practically usable. He also noted that he had preferred the already-translated (BCP from Sarum) Collects except where he found that the original had been altered.
To Pearsons work, we added the fixed hymn Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty to accompany the censing of the Altar in order to ensure that an appropriate hymn was used in this place.
We also added at the Offertory Procession, the hymn Let all mortal flesh keep silence. This is a 5th century hymn from the Liturgy of Saint James, translated in 1864.
We removed one or two additions to Sarum which were unarguably Crusades oriented material and we made the post-Fraction short litany a fixed feature instead of seasonal.
In many cases, we simplified the rubrics to make them more easily understandable.
Perhaps the most significant addition was that of an Epiclesis. In the course of discussions with Archbishop Hilarion (Kapral) of Sydney, it was decided to match like cloth with the original and accordingly, we adapted the Collect for the Throne of Peter from the Gothic Missal as the Epiclesis and inserted it into the above-referenced translation.
Because the Liturgy which resulted was (a) in English and (b) included the above alterations, we named it Usus Cascadae in deference to genuine Sarum scholars, while retaining a reference to Sarum on the title page in order that others would recognise its provenance.
This was put on our website - and left there.
At the same time time we had included in the Saint Colman Prayer Book the English Liturgy. This is an adaption of the Church of England Book of Common Prayer of 1549 utilising both Sarum and later liturgical works (1718 etc.). This follows very much the pattern of the Sarum - as indeed is reasonable given that Sarum was the direct antecedent of the Liturgy of 1549. Along with considerable Sarum material, we inserted the same Epiclesis as noted above, and the same two fixed hymns as noted above. We also appended the Sarum Vesting and Divesting Offices as these were commonly used by the clergy of 1549-50 together with the new rite.
This adaption was carried out strictly observing the terms of the 1907 report of the Commission of the Holy Synod of Russia, which fixed the method by which the services from the Book of Common Prayer might be adapted for use by Orthodox people.
We understand that some of the statements made by monk Aidan were caused by the fact that Benjamin Johnson inadvertently gave the URL to our English Liturgy when he meant to give the URL for our Sarum Liturgy.
However that confusion was long ago made clear to monk Aidan. He has not corrected his statements - but has said:
"We can see, by now, that nearly all the differences between what Ben called the 'ROCOR Sarum' and the SHP Sarum, have been resolved, in St. Petroc's currently-posted text, in favour of the SHP Sarum text."
In other words that we had altered our online text to align our Sarum with the text of his Old Sarum. This is proveably not true. The fact that it is untrue has been drawn to monk Aidans attention on several occasions by Benjamin Johnson, yet monk Aidan persists in this statement on his website currently.
Therefore I am reluctantly forced to use this Forum to ensure that the truth of the matter is made public.
As an additional note, quite separate from the matters noted above - I would advise that some recent scholarship is pointing to the need for a serious re-appraisal of the position of Sarum. In particular, to revising the date and authorship of the formalisation of Sarum as we know it, and to the genuine antecedents thereof. All of this may eventually throw the work of some modern publishers into question. We have a discussion in progress between several noted liturgists, hierarchs, myself and others reviewing this material in the hope that perhaps new light may be shed and new research initiated.
Fr. Michael
Quote:
Background: In 2004 Ben Johnson, an advocate for the Antiochian Western rite, posted 45 public accusations against the SHP text. Below each objection is followed by a reply from editor Fr. Aidan (Keller) . Mr. Johnson wrote his objections with the (mistaken) understanding that a certain e-text from St. Petroc's Monastery, Cascades, Tasmania (ROCOR) , was a Sarum Mass. Very soon after the 45 Objections were e-broadcast, St. Petroc withdrew that text and issued a Sarum Mass text (with some local edits) , called the "Usus Cascadae": the Use of Cascades, Tasmania.
Objection 1: The ROCOR specifies a different (and very familiar!) hymn to be sung during the entrance from your version.
Reply: What had appeared was a Protestant hymn ("Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God almighty" ) written by R. Heber (+1826). I remember hearing this fine hymn at my grandmother's Methodist church when a boy. But the currently-posted text at the Cascades website gives the same procedure as the SHP Sarum: the ancient Office ("officium" ) of the day is sung as the clergy enter.
Let all mortal is an 18th. c. hymn which was composed in France
Initial Note: SHP means Saint Hilarion Press. This press was and is owned by a non-canonical group calling itself Orthodox.
Very soon after the 45 Objections were e-broadcast, St. Petroc withdrew that text and issued a Sarum Mass text (with some local edits), called the "Usus Cascadae"
This is untrue. It was untrue when it was originally published and it is still untrue now that it has been re-published.
The Saint Colman Prayer Book was in the course of compilation from 1997 to 2003 and at that stage, the texts of the three versions of the Divine Liturgy contained therein had been proof read by Archbishop Hilarion and his letter of authorisation for inclusion had been written.
(Since that time, additional material to the Book - but NOT to the Liturgies - has been required and has now been completed)
The text of the Sarum (Usus Cascadae) Liturgy is essentially the Sarum Use as translated into English by A. Harford Pearson and published in 1868 - although including some few translations of our own. Pearson noted in his introduction that he had preferred the Authorised Version for Biblical texts and the Coverdale (BCP) version for Psalms as being most familiar to our culture and practically usable. He also noted that he had preferred the already-translated (BCP from Sarum) Collects except where he found that the original had been altered.
To Pearsons work, we added the fixed hymn Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty to accompany the censing of the Altar in order to ensure that an appropriate hymn was used in this place.
We also added at the Offertory Procession, the hymn Let all mortal flesh keep silence. This is a 5th century hymn from the Liturgy of Saint James, translated in 1864.
We removed one or two additions to Sarum which were unarguably Crusades oriented material and we made the post-Fraction short litany a fixed feature instead of seasonal.
In many cases, we simplified the rubrics to make them more easily understandable.
Perhaps the most significant addition was that of an Epiclesis. In the course of discussions with Archbishop Hilarion (Kapral) of Sydney, it was decided to match like cloth with the original and accordingly, we adapted the Collect for the Throne of Peter from the Gothic Missal as the Epiclesis and inserted it into the above-referenced translation.
Because the Liturgy which resulted was (a) in English and (b) included the above alterations, we named it Usus Cascadae in deference to genuine Sarum scholars, while retaining a reference to Sarum on the title page in order that others would recognise its provenance.
This was put on our website - and left there.
At the same time time we had included in the Saint Colman Prayer Book the English Liturgy. This is an adaption of the Church of England Book of Common Prayer of 1549 utilising both Sarum and later liturgical works (1718 etc.). This follows very much the pattern of the Sarum - as indeed is reasonable given that Sarum was the direct antecedent of the Liturgy of 1549. Along with considerable Sarum material, we inserted the same Epiclesis as noted above, and the same two fixed hymns as noted above. We also appended the Sarum Vesting and Divesting Offices as these were commonly used by the clergy of 1549-50 together with the new rite.
This adaption was carried out strictly observing the terms of the 1907 report of the Commission of the Holy Synod of Russia, which fixed the method by which the services from the Book of Common Prayer might be adapted for use by Orthodox people.
We understand that some of the statements made by monk Aidan were caused by the fact that Benjamin Johnson inadvertently gave the URL to our English Liturgy when he meant to give the URL for our Sarum Liturgy.
However that confusion was long ago made clear to monk Aidan. He has not corrected his statements - but has said:
"We can see, by now, that nearly all the differences between what Ben called the 'ROCOR Sarum' and the SHP Sarum, have been resolved, in St. Petroc's currently-posted text, in favour of the SHP Sarum text."
In other words that we had altered our online text to align our Sarum with the text of his Old Sarum. This is proveably not true. The fact that it is untrue has been drawn to monk Aidans attention on several occasions by Benjamin Johnson, yet monk Aidan persists in this statement on his website currently.
Therefore I am reluctantly forced to use this Forum to ensure that the truth of the matter is made public.
As an additional note, quite separate from the matters noted above - I would advise that some recent scholarship is pointing to the need for a serious re-appraisal of the position of Sarum. In particular, to revising the date and authorship of the formalisation of Sarum as we know it, and to the genuine antecedents thereof. All of this may eventually throw the work of some modern publishers into question. We have a discussion in progress between several noted liturgists, hierarchs, myself and others reviewing this material in the hope that perhaps new light may be shed and new research initiated.
Fr. Michael
